To incite fear of Muslim migrants, a man in the Czech Republic carried out attacks on railway lines. According to the agency ČTK, a court in Prague sentenced the 71-year-old man to four years in prison on Monday for terrorism. In addition, he must undergo outpatient psychiatric treatment. In the summer of 2017, the convicted man had had trees fall on railway tracks. Although trains collided with the obstacle in two cases, nobody was injured. In the surrounding area, the pensioner distributed a fake letter of confession from Islamic terrorists calling for attacks on "infidels". The former electrician confessed in court. He is said to have openly expressed sympathies for right-wing extremist positions in the past and to have planned the actions for a long time. It was not a sudden attack or outburst of rage, the judge stressed. An expert opinion attested that the accused was responsible. For the first time, a paragraph in the Czech Code of Law was applied, which makes terrorist attacks a punishable offence. The maximum sentence would have been 15 years. Although the Czech Republic has hardly received any refugees, fears of immigrants have dominated the public debate in the EU member state for years.

This is not correct. There is a well-known case of an Iraqui family that had been offered home in Jihlava city. It was standard quality appartment (that many local people can't afford), they called it a "repaired cowhide"in a TV spot, as their only real aim was to get to Germany. We know why. The NGO involved in this case was trying to deny the translation of the "repaired cowhide" in the TV spot as incorrect, fortunately the TV spot was already available on Internet so other Persian language translators confirmed it was correct. The NGO lied the first time. Then the NGO was involved helping them to illegally get into Germany but the German border police caught them and returned back. The NGO lied for the second time trying to deny their involment again. After several failed attempts to get to Germany and stay there they suddenly realized there is no longer any danger for them in Iraq (link)

So we already have had experience with this kind of people. When they hadn't managed to get into Germany or Sweden, they rather returned back to their "dangerous" home country. Draw your conclusion. I have zero sympathy for such scumbags.

Oh, I can sympathize with people who seek a better life very easily. Of course, using the asylum system for that is wrong, so sending people back who are not in danger in their home country is the correct thing to do.

However, it is also equally wrong to generalize as you do and to dehumanize people as "trash". This is the very same thing that motivated the 71 Czech man to do something "stupid" (more like evil). While there are many people who do not deserve official refugee status, there also are many who do. While there are some who are criminal, there also are many who aren't. Judging people based on their ethnicity, religion or country of origin is wrong.

Would you like it if people also generalized the Czechs based on the the wrongdoings of the 71 year old right-wing terrorist? This generalization would be as wrong as yours.

Judging people based on their ethnicity, religion or country of origin is wrong.

Would you like it if people also generalized the Czechs based on the the wrongdoings of the 71 year old right-wing terrorist? This generalization would be as wrong as yours.

The generalization is called experience there. I have another example, in 90's when the Soviet Bloc collapsed and we could finally travel to western countries for shopping, there started to appear signs "Czech, don't steal!" in shops close to the border. While you can call that a generalization, I fully understand the reason behind and don't feel offended at all, because it was based on their experience. Of course, all Czech aren't thieves but they had experience that there was a high correlation between opening the borders and increasing number of these incidents.

Many of these "immigrants" have no documents, have false documents, lies about their origin, age, name, comes without the whole family or going back to the "dangerous" home country for regular vacations, I can also say they're liars who don't deserve any help and just "feed" these NGOs that support their lies instead of sending them back immidiately. It is called experience again because there is more than an isolated or marginal number of such cases. Some people working in the camps in Greece reported that almost 80% of them weren't seeking any asylum, just abusing the EU naivity. If they were really seeking an asylum, they would accept any EU country to live in because there is no war. All of these ~130 asylum seekers imported by a NGO here in Czech did their best to get to Germany or Sweden. Again, we know why.

I call "trash" the individuals who can't behave here and they know very well what they did is wrong.

Would you like it if people also generalized the Czechs based on the the wrongdoings of the 71 year old right-wing terrorist? This generalization would be as wrong as yours.

I haven't been posting much in this thread, because my experience has been that political debates usually go nowhere, but I have been following it, and your basic claim which you seem to repeat every time Puppy brings another case is that "generalizations are wrong".

I know very well where this claim comes from because I was taught the same things in school, but you know what? The teachings fell a couple of steps too short, because they are in fact inaccurate.

Generalizations are not only not always wrong, often they are the only right thing to do. When making policy decisions dealing with large populations as groups, one has no choice but to accept generalizations as guidelines. For example, if analysis shows that a large portion of the population (whether based on ethnicity, gender, age, whatever) has a tendency to (A) or prefers/requires (B), then the generic policy that aims to deal with issues relevant to said group should take (A) and (B) into account.

What's wrong is actually not the generalizations, but the "specializations" - saying that if a majority (or even a large minority) of the group has (X), then let's assume that everyone has (X), and a priori deal with every individual of the group as if they had (X). This is where things usually go awry.

If a policymaker has data about a certain group of people, it isn't really a generalization in my mind. For example: Migrants from the Maghreb states (Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, Libya) are very high up in the crime statistic. Now, it would be a generalization (or specialization, call it what you will) to say that all people from there are criminals, but stating that many crimes are carried out by people from these states is not.

But that is not what is happening in this thread. Puppy just posts criminal cases that were carried out by refugees / migrants and then goes on to generalize based on that, calling people trash etc. – this is very dangerous rhetoric, because when some individual is criminal, he should be blamed and punished, not the group he belongs to generally. That is justice and generalizing just leads to more injustice, because when you do that, it suddenly isn't enough to punish the perpetrator of said crime – no, if you generalize a group (which in the case of the refugees is very diverse with people from many different nations including Somalia, Eritrea, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan), only punishing or removing the group altogether remains as the "solution". This is not very unlike how people here in Germany used to talk about the Jews...

We can all acknowledge that people make prejudiced generalizations like that, but I've been reading and it is not my observation that such behavior is taking place in this thread. Granted it can look like it, if you are sensitive to prejudice, but I do not believe the TP forum members are of those prejudices. It is easy to claim anyone on any side is prejudiced, irrational, or immoral. That I have seen go around this thread and that is unproductive to reasonable discussion.

There are many ethical problems in taking in migrants and refugees. It is bad to leave innocent people to die in their home countries, and it is bad to bring in criminals who hurt and kill members of host population. Innocent people from either side do not deserve what happens to them. A political choice is made, whether to help refugees and accept that members of the sovereign population will suffer from the bad ones, or let the refugees suffer and maintain quality of life for the sovereign citizens. Politics and ethics intersect.

Personally I agree it's wrong for a nation to put the rights of its citizens under the rights of non-citizens, as some European countries and sanctuary cities in America have in policy. I don't expect politicians who take this line to maintain popularity, this is why nationalism and the far-right are on the rise, not to suggest they are better overall. We should agree the citizens, innocent bystanders to political shenanigans, do not deserve to suffer and die. Of course, refugees don't deserve their suffering either, and there should be a better solution other than blind acceptance that does not compromise the rights and lives of sovereign citizens.

Puppy just posts criminal cases that were carried out by refugees / migrants and then goes on to generalize based on that, calling people trash etc.

It is called statistics, compare it to the situation ten or twenty years ago. And no, we don't have to accept it and live with that, because we already know it has affected our lifestyle. If there is a group of people that poses a high risk, the goverment should takeover more control over it, instead of trying to downplay these "isolated" cases and let the NGOs do the dirty job. To cut all financial support of these NGO smugglers is the first step to find a solution. I don't care what nation these people are, I do care of the reasons why they have come here. And the reason is hardly seeking an asylum in many cases, as I already explained earlier.

And yes, it isn't their fault in the first place. It is our fault we (EU) can't deal with that saying clear that Europe isn't a paradise where you can come, do whatever you want (including illegal practices like children marriage) and get unlimited social security support without touching any work for the rest of your life. But it works like that now, unfortunately. Remember the first official Merkel's message, that Europe needs a lot of engineers, technicians, doctors and this is how to get them? Isn't the reality that half of these people coming here are illiterate?

There are many ethical problems in taking in migrants and refugees It is bad to leave innocent people to die in their home countries, and it is bad to bring in criminals who hurt and kill members of host population. Innocent people from either side do not deserve what happens to them. A political choice is made, whether to help refugees and accept that members of the sovereign population will suffer from the bad ones, or let the refugees suffer and maintain quality of life for the sovereign citizens. Politics and ethics intersect.

Normally no, only because in this case, it was an uncontrolled flow of refugees. That is something that happened because for years, politicians from Northern European countries turned a blind eye to the whole issue (because it is a very controversial problem obviously), which led to the situation that was uncontrollable in 2015.

It is called statistics, compare it to the situation ten or twenty years ago.

No, it is called bad statistics. Germany has taken in more than 1.5 million refugees, taking a few cases, even if there hundreds, can not be used to generalize 1.5 million people.

Looking at the actual statistic that compares the number of violent crimes 20 years ago to today, there is no real difference: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten ... inalitaet/ Germany wasn't a crime free country 20 years ago and it very likely won't be a crime free country in 20 years.

The difference of course between "domestic crime" and "refugee crime" is that domestic crimes are not really that widely reported. If someone gets murdered, do you think this is more than regional news? No. But when a group of refugees beats 12 people up, it instantly becomes national news.

If there is a group of people that poses a high risk, the goverment should takeover more control over it

That is what governments are already doing. This includes things like trying to make deportations of people from Maghreb states easier, deporting criminals etc. – I am not really sure what else they should do. Deportations are an incredibly difficult task, because the countries of origin have to accept their people back and the migrants have rights as well, so they can sue, which delays things. Yes, it would be nice if this wouldn't be so problematic, but we do have a state with a functioning justice system where everyone has the right to get a fair trial.

What governments absolutely should not do on the other hand is to punish all refugees for crimes of single individuals. It will only hinder integration and potentially lead to more crime in the end.

Normally no, only because in this case, it was an uncontrolled flow of refugees. That is something that happened because for years, politicians from Northern European countries turned a blind eye to the whole issue (because it is a very controversial problem obviously), which led to the situation that was uncontrollable in 2015.

If you consider Germany a Northern European country ... Merkel has started all the Big Mistake.

Looking at the actual statistic that compares the number of violent crimes 20 years ago to today, there is no real difference: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten ... inalitaet/ Germany wasn't a crime free country 20 years ago and it very likely won't be a crime free country in 20 years.

That is what governments are already doing. This includes things like trying to make deportations of people from Maghreb states easier, deporting criminals etc.

It apparently doesn't work. The last case in Austria I linked confirms that because the attacker was supposed to be deported (or at least isolated from the society because of his past misbehavior) before he did it. It wouldn't happen if goverment had taken the care of local citizens protection seriously instead of prioritizing the silly political correctness.

“These refugees do not respect our women,” said Ilkka, a 33-year-old sprinkler installer who would give only his first name. “I have four daughters, and they used to be safe in Finland. We need to do something about it.”

Even foreign-born residents who have lived here for years say they have noticed a disturbing change. Abbas al-Arja — a 25-year-old former Iraqi boxer who moved to Finland in 2010 — said he intervened in the town center last month to stop two young Iraqi asylum seekers who were pushing themselves onto a Finnish woman who was “clearly uncomfortable.”

“We still need more specific information and analysis before we can say that there is a connection between the increase in rapes and sexual harassment cases and the increase in the number of refugees,” Helsinki Police Chief Lasse Aapio said. “But we need to be alert, and of course we are worried, because it’s obvious that we’re facing some changes in our society right now.”

The comments section also interesting (if true):

2/3/2016 5:32 PM GMT+0100: Are you calling us Finns paranoid? It's 17 times more likely to get raped by a migrant men than a Finn.Refugees have been here about 6 months,50 rapes or sexual attacs or harrasment.Police have to go to a refugee centers every single day,fighting,robbing,stabbings,war crime suspects,terrorist suspect,drinking and fighting among refugees

SO..!
you reap what you sow..
you allow the politically correct to run your life and they WILL run your life into the dirt..
if it were up to me i would build a wall and throw the miscreants and all their type OUT.. it is not asylum they seek but soft targets and free stuff..
(i must admit to being in a terse mood just now)

EDIT:
as for the finns forming self defense groups aka vigilante groups, i would observe that they are not paranoid, just watching out for themselves where their government fails to govern the islamic invaders they allowed into their country..
islam does not respect women, they mutilate women and control women..

Bill Morrow, kept by parrots & cockatoos
Sysop - forum.thinkpads.com

*She was not what you would call refined,She was not what you would call unrefined,She was the type of person who kept a parrot.
~~~Mark Twain~~~

As an alternative, the Health Ministry is now launching a €1-million study into ultrasound testing.
Wisely spent money again

If someone has lied about their age, you don't know what else they might have lied about," he said, adding that each case should be considered individually.
The first time someone has actually used the brain

This news caused horror all over Austria on Wednesday: a 34-year-old Turkish citizen killed a 49-year-old officer of the District Authority Dornbirn with a stab in the neck. After it became known that a ban on residence was issued against the Turks in 2009, many questions came up. krone.at is looking for answers.

But why could the 34-year-old stay in Austria and kill an official? The Federal Office for Aliens and Asylum (BFA) tries to answer a few questions in a press release. For example, it is said that due to existing EU law, "in spite of a residence ban at the time of applying for asylum, an application for asylum should be examined and an asylum procedure instituted". The applicant therefore has "a temporary right of residence and a de facto deportation protection", according to the BFA.

The police, chasing the man by helicopter and police dogs, arrested an Iraqi (25) on Sunday afternoon as the alleged perpetrator.

Also in Nuremberg, a woman became the victim of a knife attack in the early morning hours. The 21-year-old ran along with an acquaintance (18) at 5 clock along the Fürth Street, when it was attacked and injured at the local court for no apparent reason by a man with a knife.

I think the reason is clear. Merkel said Germany needs another 260,000 possible attackers that hates local culture.

If only we were allowed to deal with them in a "GTA manner", the problem wouldn't exist to begin with. You know that better than anyone else...

Some reading: The Peaceful Takeover of Europe https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/1354 ... l-takeover
This gradual creation of a parallel Islamic society is a process that has been going on in France, for instance, for the past 15 years. It began with the activities of organizations that, under the pretext of integrating the descendants of migrants to combat juvenile delinquency, are run by religious indoctrinators. These organizations ensure order and peace in Muslim neighborhoods, while simultaneously suppressing individual thought on the part of Muslim youth, and cultivating total commitment to imams.

Social workers in these districts are sidelined, as their role is taken over by members of the Muslim community and imams. Muslim families often will not even let social workers past their doorstep, and social workers increasingly receive insults, when not death threats.[8] Meanwhile, many social workers themselves are trying to appease Muslim clients, by attempting to help them receive benefits to which they are not entitled.